Full TGIF Record # 151007
Item 1 of 1
Web URL(s):https://archive.lib.msu.edu/tic/its/articles/2009jou299.pdf
    Last checked: 10/18/2011
    Requires: PDF Reader
Access Restriction:Certain MSU-hosted archive URLs may be restricted to legacy database members.
Publication Type:
i
Refereed
Author(s):Aldous, D. E.; Haydu, J. J.; Moir, R. N.
Author Affiliation:Aldous: Melbourne School of Land and Food, The University of Melbourne, Burnley Campus, Richmond, Victoria, Australia; Haydu: Food and Resource Economics Department, Mid-Florida Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Apopka, Florida; Moir: Turf Producers Australia Limited, Bateman, Australia
Title:Benchmarking the Australian sod industry
Section:Establishment and maintenance
Other records with the "Establishment and maintenance" Section
Meeting Info.:Santiago, Chile: July 26-30 2009
Source:International Turfgrass Society Research Journal. Vol. 11, No. Part 1, 2009, p. 299-311.
Publishing Information:Madison, WI: International Turfgrass Society
# of Pages:13
Keywords:TIC Keywords: Sod industry; Sod production; Water shortage; Water use restrictions; Surveys
Abstract/Contents:"Australia's first national sod production survey, completed in September 2007 for the 2006 calendar year, showed an industry that contained 215 growers, produced 4,918 ha of turfgrass and had a total value of turfgrass production estimated to be $AUS235.7 million. The survey, which consisted of 79 usable surveys, and representing a 36 percent response rate, not only undertook a financial audit on the Australian sod industry but also investigated the agronomic and cultural differences that exist across the five Australian states. Results showed that warm season grasses Buffalo grass (Stenotaphrum secundatum (Walter) Kuntze), Bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.), and the cool season grass Tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) were the top three grasses in terms of trade and accounted for 85 percent of production. Economic information on the production, administration/marketing and landscape services accounted for 65.5 percent, 27.5 percent and 7.2 percent of total production respectively. Production, which included mowing, fertilizing, applying pesticides and herbicides) accounted for 12.7 percent of growing expenses. Irrigation (water and/or pump costs (maintenance + fuel/electricity)) accounted for 5.0 percent of growing costs. Harvesting methods (equipment operating costs, pallets) constituted 6.1 percent of growing activities with 36 percent of harvesting occurring over spring and early summer. The common target market was the homeowner (35 percent). Major problems confronting producers were water shortages (32 percent) and financial information (30 percent) with labor, production-related, regulatory, marketing and grades and standards averaged 6.5 percent. Major problems facing industry were water restrictions (41 percent), financial information, marketing and regulatory, averaging 13 percent) and grades and standards, production and competition, averaging 4.3 percent. The researchers also investigated the significance that the Turf Producers Australia (Ltd) (TPAL) have played in developing research with the development of a National Statutory Levy and Export Charge, and Australia's first Turf Industry Stocktake Report."
Language:English
References:39
Note:Tables
Graphs
ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
Aldous, D. E., J. J. Haydu, and R. N. Moir. 2009. Benchmarking the Australian sod industry. Int. Turfgrass Soc. Res. J. 11(Part 1):p. 299-311.
Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=151007
If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 151007.
Choices for finding the above item:
Web URL(s):
https://archive.lib.msu.edu/tic/its/articles/2009jou299.pdf
    Last checked: 10/18/2011
    Requires: PDF Reader
Find Item @ MSU
MSU catalog number: b2548899
Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record)